Structure

In this section the basis for the structural principles of landscape change are drawn out using quotes from key informant accounts. Landscape change should be balanced. First, this implies a measure of system level coherence between land uses and the host landscape.

… it is some form of balanced system [because] … this is naturally a dry environment and generally speaking, farming that responds to and relates to the ambient conditions is going to be seen as more sustainable than one that forces a different kind of farming [dependent on intensive irrigation] … P5.

Secondly, the outcomes should also be fairly shared throughout the community, on immediate and distant landscapes.

… achieving social harmony … there has to be benefits right across the spectrum if at all

153 However, balance is also encountered as an ideal process framing legislation around conciliatory decisions. The argument is that acceptable decisions on change should be reached by considering opposed interests, whether internal or external to the landscape. These decisions reproduced as change on the landscape are to reflect the needs and interests of the diverse players on the landscape.

… you’ve got to balance between what you want and what the other people want … I have had to make decisions on things that are not my beliefs … when you are sitting at a panel and you have both sides put to you … C8.

Although balance above has focused on physical aspects, it is not clear if the respondents assume that balancing of interests in the processes will produce balanced outcomes on the landscape. Furthermore, this principle is reinterpreted constructively to frame aspirations or explain existing situations. This signifies the balance of the social valuing, economic use as well as environmental facets in decision making. For example;

… economic progress [is the main value driving intensification] … but there has to be

environmental progress and social progress of the communities in here … C9.

... so there are various ways how the landscapes are valued by different people but at the

end of the day we all live here, we need to make a living in probably one of the most beautiful countries in the world and it’s important to strike that balance that enables

farmers to continue doing what they do, and for sustainable use of resources such as

water to be fairly distributed but without necessarily changing the ecological balance of

that land to someone’s, one person’s benefit and not everyone else’s … P1.

Landscape changes should be distributed across the landscape. Two types of distribution are implied here. First, land uses or facilities that impact heavily on the landscape are to be located where demand is highest, and arguably where human impacts are already evident. This reduces effects over other less intensely impacted landscapes, such as unspoilt rural landscapes that are guarded jealously, see for example;

… to me wind-farms belong in a working environment where man has already got his footprint rather than being on the skyline…they need to be nearer consumers … C9. The idea of localisation of impacts exposes a related argument that;

… Central Otago is actually really being exploited in many ways not to look after Central

Otago but exploited on behalf of national benefits. So when it came to the proposal to

build a wind-farm you know on the Lammermoors, I became involved in that because of

friends who heightened, awakened to me the concerns that this was a special landscape

and we were gonna change it from a landscape that had both heritage and

environmental values into what effectively was going to be an industrial landscape … I9.

Effectively this begins to constructs the regionalism discourse which will be revisited in the discussion of context and resilience principles. The second facet of distribution seeks to spatially

154 spread development across landscape consequently sharing effects. For instance to reduce the impact of large land use changes, such as dams, the projects should be broken into smaller units but spread over the landscape. While this may mean changes across the landscape, localised heavy impact changes are mitigated.

… and then the idea of having some farms that have … access to their own water … that again suggests to me probably a better way of farming. It’s much lower impact, it’s localised, it is using the local resource. Where there is the local resource, for instance, a stream coming off the hill side it makes sense perhaps to build a small storage area to capture some of that … P5

Landscape change should recognise and enhance indigeneity, and identity. Indigeneity of landscape addresses the native features including species on a particular landscape. However, how the individuals relate to this indigeneity, influences whether they are perceived as belonging in the landscape, enhancing it, or draining from its identity. This therefore implies identity, not just of place and the landscape but the community too. This landscape gets its identity from its native species

… biodiversity is fundamental … especially indigenous biodiversity … P4.

… and it’s not just trees, it’s the wrong kind of tree, you know ,if it were Totara and Kauri , I think we’d think a bit differently, but it is not. It is an exotic that is obliterating indigenous communities and I [have opinions] very strong to say on indigenous character and preserving what we have got and stemming the tide of loss … I6.

Therefore, w

hen considering changes as decision makers we ought …

… to come back to fundamental principles, [and ask ourselves] is it healthy? Is it

expressing local identity, local character? Is it sustaining biodiversity? And more

importantly is it bringing back the indigenous biodiversity and character? Those are

some of the fundamentals that I always put in front of me when am thinking about landscape change and my role in that as a decision maker … P5.

Preservation and enhancement of indigeneity is not an end in itself, but means the active management of landscape identity, both place and species. Whatever subtracts from indigenous identity, for example, exotic plant species, rabbits and possums should be eliminated.

… wilding trees are a threat]…yes, it’s wind-blown, I mean, a lot of people say, ‘but I like

trees on the hills, I don’t like the bare hills’ well if you don’t like the bare hills go and live

in Canada or somewhere …C15.

… I don’t like this dry barren grass and landscape ’- and you sort of think ‘why are you living here? If you like trees go and live in America or some … I 6.

In addition limits, to human activities, are proposed to preserve this identity.

… ‘A World of Difference’ infers to me … it infers that there are limits because if you

155 It is strongly felt that those of opposing views threaten the identity, and are not welcome. The discourse also exposes claims of what constitutes local identity, not just the landscape, but the way of valuing. A local should value the dry open landscape; otherwise, they are not an authentic part of the community.

… and most people know how special the landscape is in Central Otago and related to it but not everybody. I think because landscape is such an important part of Central Otago, you know everybody kind of relates to it. It’s very different from a lot of New Zealand, it’s way up there in terms of [hierarchy of uniqueness], the landscape ... I 7.

This implies that the respondents are defining community not just where they live, community of place, but by an expectation that they have certain values that express an ‘authentic’ identity. How and by whom this is defined in unvoiced.

The arguments against ‘Canadian or American’ landscape are a reaction to the growth of wilding pines, and conversion of the open grassland landscape to a globalised ‘alpine’ landscape. This is not just about exotic, out of New Zealand landscape identities, but other regional landscapes are implied as well, to bring out the uniqueness of Central Otago. For example;

… Queenstown for instance it was very much a town on a fairly open scrubby sort of landscape on the hills behind … Those slopes are now totally covered in coniferous forests, Douglas fir or Oregon, and people who arrive there will see it as part of the alpine scene

because these people are familiar with the equivalent of thealpine scene in the northern

hemisphere. So it is a concocted sort of scene, it is an exotic scene actually, […] a chunk of

Queenstown is exotic … I 5.

The arguments above complement and are used to justify conservation of biodiversity. Respondents also argue that the identity of the landscape should also guide or determine the land uses which are suitable for the district.

… land use should be a] natural expression of resources and the landscape…-[should avoid

non contextual uses which] could be anywhere… [with] no reference to local character …

P5.

However councils are seen as not being very adept in recognising what affects this identity. … I think Otago was about the only region in the country for example where hawthorn was not a banned plant hmmm you know they don’t recognise any of these other weed problems. They just threw their arms up in horror when recently when people said ‘you ought to be doing something about wilding conifers’ they said ‘well, that’s a landscape

issue, we don’t touch landscape’- what about ecology?-what about losing our original

identity?... I 7.

To build on what has already been lost, interviewees proposed that, Landscape change should protect or reintroduce biodiversity. This is proposed to stem historical and continuing loss of plant and animal species from the landscape.

156 … But you know, to come back to fundamental principles, is it healthy? Is it expressing local identity, local character? Is it sustaining biodiversity? And more importantly is it

bringing back the indigenous biodiversity and character? Those are some of the

fundamentals that I always put in front of me when am thinking about landscape change and my role in that as a decision maker … P5.

… I would argue that we need to have a debate about restoring some of our

biodiversity…so we don’t lose any more … C9.

The concept of diversity recurs when examining function cluster of principles. It is proposed that for communities to utilise the landscape more profitably, they need to move from monocultures. This is captured in the quotes below;

... monocultures don’t work…the bee population has declined because…we have

monoculture and use chemicals…it changes everything … C15.

… in Central Otago I don’t have an issue with some dairying, I wouldn’t like to see the

whole valley you know monoculture of dairying right throughout the valley floors I hope

that never comes to that I hope it’s only select areas … I 8.

The argument that certain land uses may be alright in ‘select areas’ begins to hint at context.

Landscape change decisions should be contextual. Any given landscape exists within a wider landscape and with relationships with others. This principle has several facets, the national, regional and the local contexts. From the national scale, regions are presented as suitable for certain land uses qualified on the basis of climate, or historical use.

… In terms of the greater effect on this area…I think it would be tragic … in the Waikato and other areas- dairy was set for it, but certainly in much of south Island it wasn’t … C5. The intrinsic ability of a landscape to accommodate change influences what needs to be done to modify it for new uses, and whether that type of change I acceptable.

… there are still places like that that are quite hostile in terms of growing things but … I

think that’s that. I guess it goes back to the thing of deciding where the areas are that are

okay to modify to be able to support yourselves … I 5.

The argument is also used to reframe the issues of proximity of utilities, such as power generation, to the users. For example,

… to me wind-farms belong in a working environment where man has already got his

footprint rather than being on the skyline…they need to be nearer consumers …. C9. At the local level, topography and historical use provide precedent about what is suitable land use. Here context seeks to match these land uses to available land and resources, and secondly to minimise adverse effects on the environment. For example, water intensive land uses on a dry landscape are to be avoided. The professionals argue that;

157 … [land use should be a] natural expression of resources and the landscape …-[should avoid non contextual uses which] could be anywhere … [with] no reference to local character … P5.

… good decisions, means they have to have an overall appreciation of context … there are appropriate landscapes for particular purposes … P1.

… having it [intensive farming] bordering the river could be an issue generally speaking intensive land use next to a river immediately raises a red flag. So that would be one thing that you would be looking at very closely …and obviously in the wider landscape you would be looking at the surface and ground water systems, and how the intensively developed areas relate to those systems and affect them … P5.

Contextual decision making on change should also be informed by what is happening outside the immediate context…

… [landscape decisions should reflect] a concern of what happens in and outside [the

locale] …. P6.

This argument points back to land use suitability, but also hints at governance issues of insider- outsider relationships addressed later. Landscape change should be physically appropriate. Land use change should be suitable to physical conditions. This is not just about allocating land uses locally, but examining whether those land uses would be better suited to other areas outside the locality.

… is that land use in a sustainable way appropriate for this valley while there are other

possible or appropriate landscapes where that type of activity can occur … P1.

… because this is naturally a dry environment and generally speaking, farming that

responds to and relates to the ambient conditions … [not] … intensive farming … [which]

… is trying to force a 2000 per annum mm rainfall to an area that is four to eight hundred … P5.

… to me wind-farms belong in a working environment … they need to be nearer

consumers … C9.

… this was a special landscape and we were gonna change it from a landscape that had

both heritage and environmental values into what effectively was going to be an

industrial landscape, you know with a couple of hundred of these damn windmills and

turbines … I 9.

The principle of appropriateness points to valuing of landscapes nationally and locally. There are landscapes which are accepted as industrial or intensely used, Waikato is given as an example, and other landscapes seen as iconic, and therefore should not be exposed to industrial use, such as Central Otago. Research beyond the current scope of this study, needs to examine attitudes people have and valuations made for landscapes outside their own local contexts.

Landscape change should be spatially, and temporally holistic and harmonious across scales.

158 as an integral unit. As a whole, landscape change decision making should incorporate the social, environmental and economic aspects

… [look beyond political boundaries]… because they may look at this part of the mountain

and one district council says ‘these are the values there’ but the mountain doesn’t stop

there in the district boundary. And the next district says these are the values our

community have, so you get windmills on one side and none on the other so to speak…

landscape is contiguous, … should be a regional issue … C8.

… So that would be one thing that you would be looking at very closely … and obviously

in the wider landscape you would be looking at the surface and ground water systems,

and how the intensively developed areas relate to those systems and affect them … P5. At the temporal scale it looks at the impacts of decision over the short and long terms.

… What would the long-term impact … in the landscape context what would the long-

term impact be? Is it just a slight change in vegetation cover that’s going to make a long

term change away from those wide open, dry grounds landscapes that Central often is

identified with?... or is it that it’s going as far as understanding is it long-term or short-

term … will it make significant physical changes or is it quite surface changes that happen

to it? … P2.

Harmony signifies framing changes for congruence across the region, and over time. Landscape change should be incremental. This means incremental in type, scale and speed. Change is opposed when it differs very much from the tradition or the common change communities are used to, or when communities feel they have no control over the changes.

… it is the transformational changes that have us worried…dairy is a radical change and

the intensification that goes with it … sheep and beef farming are not

transformational…and that has been the tradition here for the last …100 years … C2 -Financially they are putting conditions on us … we are just not going to be able to do it,

the way we want to … because it needs to be a step by step process … they need to give

us more time to do this … C1.

The scale and speed of change influences how the community is able to assimilate and adapt to change.

… but I mean obviously it’s going to be on a much bigger scale but it doesn’t seem to be …

something overly new, it’s sort of an expansion of what is already there, utilising some

of the existing infrastructure already, so that … again doesn’t seem that unpalatable assuming everyone has decided that mining operations are of benefit and are not going to … affect … P3.

… the sort of scale that you are intimating here would probably make people go, what?!

…That would be a radical change from the 180 to 200 almost odd years of pastoral

history. So, that in itself would be quite a big thing for the community to swallow … P5.

In document Pathways to resilient futures: distilling principles to guide landscape policy decisions (Page 153-160)